17

CASE 17







B978072953884810017X/gr1.jpg is missing


Incident


A 28-year-old female motorcyclist has collided with a vehicle sustaining multiple injuries including a presumed traumatic brain injury and chest, abdominal, pelvic and limb injuries.

Pre-hospital RSI has been performed. The patient also required bilateral simple thoracostomies and volume resuscitation for pleural collections and haemodynamic instability. She is packaged with splinted fractures and has received sedation, analgesia and long acting muscle relaxants ready for transfer to the major trauma hospital (40 minutes by road ambulance).

Clinical information:




• P 130.


• BP 90/60 mmHg.


• ETCO2 33 mmHg (4.4 kPa).


• SaO2 99% on 50% inspired oxygen.


Relevant information




Questions






17.1 Discuss the issues generated by this scenario.


17.2 Assuming that you decide to continue with only the initial patient, describe the principles for handing over pre-hospital trauma patients to Emergency Department staff.


Discussion






17.1 Distractions and potential diversions are common in the pre-hospital and retrieval environment. On occasion, the PHR team may feel pressured to make rapid operational decisions which could require careful explanation later. The situation described here is often referred to as a ‘running call’ and is essentially an unexpected occurrence leading to additional patient contact. It generates several problematic questions:




• Do you stop?


• Do you leave your initial patient to assess the new patient?


• Do you stay with the new patient and leave the initial patient?


• Do you split up?

There is no definitive answer to this scenario. However, there are serious considerations.

Your existing patient is minimally differentiated, multiply injured and clinically unstable. She requires urgent assessment and ongoing care in a major trauma hospital. You have sedated and muscle relaxed this patient and she is now entirely dependent on mechanical ventilation and advanced clinical decisions to ensure, for example, optimal cerebral perfusion.

The clinical condition and requirements of the second patient are, at this moment, unknown. He may be uninjured, intoxicated, have an occult medical presentation or have sustained unsurvivable injuries. Only a reasonably thorough assessment will provide some degree of differentiation. It is perhaps reasonable to briefly (less than 5 minutes) leave your patient in order to quickly assess the new patient but to let the land ambulance continue without the PHR team is a high-risk decision. What happens if the tracheal tube is dislodged and cannot be resited?

This scenario is not the same as a multi-casualty scene. You have entered into a doctor–patient relationship with a single patient and you are obliged to do your best for her. You have not yet entered into a relationship with the new patient. If his accident had occurred on the adjacent street, you would not even know about him. In addition, there will now already be other land ambulances on their way.

A central agency having responsibility for tasking PHR teams (whilst maintaining oversight of all current and pending regional tasks) is common to many highly functioning pre-hospital and retrieval services (see Case 20 and Case 39). Early and effective communication to this centre from the PHR team at the scene is critical. The tasking agency may be aware of a nearby land ambulance or second PHR team able to make a rapid response to the incident. In contrast, the PHR team has relatively limited regional ‘situational awareness’ and should therefore avoid risky self-tasking or re-tasking.
< div class='tao-gold-member'>

Stay updated, free articles. Join our Telegram channel

Jul 12, 2016 | Posted by in EMERGENCY MEDICINE | Comments Off on 17

Full access? Get Clinical Tree

Get Clinical Tree app for offline access